The Constitutional Debate on God and State
As Congress faces calls to insert a recognition of God into the Constitution, the Post-Intelligencer argues that the nation’s strength lies in its strict separation of church and state.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
Repeated efforts have been made since the adoption of our Federal constitution to theologize it by inserting a recognition of God. Representative Morse of Massachusetts has recently urged Congress to submit such a theological amendment. The founders specifically refrained from this to separate institutions from theological entanglements. Even the orthodox believers among the founders provided for the enduring separation of church and state in the First Amendment. Incorporating theism today would be an empty formality. We are in no sense a godless people; our religious freedom is exemplified better here than in any country in the world. It is the privilege of any man to worship as he pleases, or not at all. We do not burn heretics, nor do we interfere with any church unless it attempts to contravene public law, as in the case of polygamy.
“It is the privilege of any man in America to worship God in any way he pleases, or not to worship at all.”
The 1894 debate regarding the 'theological amendment' mirrors modern arguments over the role of religion in the public square, showing that the tension between secular governance and religious influence is woven deep into American political history.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.